Letting off Steam

[dj10]

I know what happened K, I was there.

[gpeluso]

What was the other protest about? Same people handling both incidents? Sounds like a real mess.................... making NASA look clean, and I'm getting tired of that very crowded run group. They start on the back and have been for 5 years. I like both groups(NASA and SCCA) but this weekend sounds screwed up....plus why is there no info about the results.....shouldn't this be highlighted on this forum? I can't wait to run ITS this fall but do not want to head to the body shop.

Greg

[RedMisted]

What was the other protest about? Same people handling both incidents? Sounds like a real mess.................... making NASA look clean, and I'm getting tired of that very crowded run group. They start on the back and have been for 5 years. I like both groups(NASA and SCCA) but this weekend sounds screwed up....plus why is there no info about the results.....shouldn't this be highlighted on this forum? I can't wait to run ITS this fall but do not want to head to the body shop.

Greg

Greg, I think things will be alright as long as the races start on the main straight. I'll argue that starting on the back straight and then trying to settle into a queue going through a longish segment like Madness is insanity... Also, make sure ITB #21 (white VW) isn't in your field...

[RacerBill]

The other protest involved Matt Green (ITB and Pat Kane (ITS). Pat was lapping Matt, Matt pointed him by, and then Pat ran into the right rear of Matt's car. Some sheet metal damage on the right rear, just behind the rear wheel, however the hit was hard enough to bend the rear axle. You have to understand that the rear axle on the Chargers is a solid beam that weighs about 40-45 pounds. Anyway, Matt's weekend was finished. BTW, this is Matt's side of the story. We had a lot of time to talk since he stopped by my house to pick up a replacement axle. The protest was well founded, however Pat claimed that his tires went away causing the hit. You be the judge.

[tom91ita]

The protest was well founded, however Pat claimed that his tires went away causing the hit. You be the judge.

agreed. very well founded indeed.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CoZAqRt9bM[/ame]

[joeg]

Tires??

He was simply punted off the track. Terrible.

[ShelbyRacer]

Tom-

Thanks for the video confirmation. If I can manage to edit my in-car, you'll be able to see me point the Acura by going into 7, and HEAR (and almost feel) the intensity of the hit from the Acura. I am still very sour about the situation, for several reasons:

1. I clearly pointed him by and left room, and did so because I saw that not only was HE (the Acura) coming, but that he was obviously racing the Miata, and I didn't want to screw that up. For that consideration, my car needs serious repair.

2. While the protest was well-founded, no action was taken because the SOM found "no malicious intent" on the part of the Acura driver. I cannot disagree with that (I don't think he *meant* to punt me), but part of being a race driver is having your car under control, and being able to race (AND allow others to race) in very close quarters. Intent is not the point. GCR 6.11.1 (the foundation of my protest) states this clearly, and makes no mention of intent. My protest was only officially filed AFTER I spoke to the Acura driver, and while apologetic to a point, he stated that since I pointed him by, he expected me to let him "have the track" (not an exact quote, but a paraphrase), and that the real cause of the incident was that his tires had been going away, and that he really lost them at that point. After 5-10 minutes of calm, rational conversation (as much as I could at that point, I felt he didn't "get it", and I informed him that a protest was filed, and that I was going to confirm that with the Chief Steward at that point (the CS asked me to talk to the guy before making my protest official- I hadn't because until I spoke to the Stewards, I wasn't calm enough to talk to the guy constructively).

3. The guy LEFT THE TRACK prior to speaking to the SOM on Saturday. Again, I *clearly* informed him of the protest, and he even commented to the Hoosier Tire guys on Saturday afternoon (which I confirmed) that the bad tires ruined his race, and that there was even a protest pending. This information was all presented to the SOM, yet they took no action.

I'm most disappointed in the fact that I feel like the driver of the Acura left the event thinking that his involvement in the hit was incidental, and that he was in a place at a time with not ideal equipment, and that the equipment shortcoming initiated the event. I feel that he needs to work on his interacting with traffic, and better master handling his car in situations that may not be what he expected. I don't hold malice towards him, and would go back out on track with him in the future, but I protested in the hopes that someone could get the message across to him. I felt I had not, and now I feel the SOM did not attempt to do so in the proper manner.

I've decided that I will probably nnot appeal the decision, but I will be contacting the SOM and CS later just to share my thoughts as I've presented them here.

Thanks for listening...

BTW Tom, thanks for showing me that I need to continue to work on my lines at MidO. I hope that I did OK for it being my first event there, but I know I have a long way to go...


Oh, and thanks a LOT to Bill for the moral support and the axle. It was one heck of a weekend.

[Gregg]

Tires? Maybe if he didn't try entering the turn from all the way on drivers' right there would have been a different outcome.

And if it were me, I'd probably protest the penalty (or lack thereof). Intent plays no part and its allowing these types of decisions to stand only makes a mockery of attempts to self-police our sport. It appears that the driver took little responsibilty for his actions and the SOM even less so.

And I'd be asking Tom for the original tape to use as new evidence.

[RacerBill]

Matt: How was the rest of your trip home? Hope the new axle works for you. Thanks for all the great information on setup and the help packing up. I have started my todo list for Labor Day.

BTW, I will need to know how to get a hold of the video you shot in Madness Sunday.

Great meeting you and Matt this weekend.

[jjjanos]

2. While the protest was well-founded, no action was taken because the SOM found "no malicious intent" on the part of the Acura driver. I cannot disagree with that (I don't think he *meant* to punt me), but part of being a race driver is having your car under control, and being able to race (AND allow others to race) in very close quarters. Intent is not the point. GCR 6.11.1 (the foundation of my protest) states this clearly, and makes no mention of intent. My protest was only officially filed AFTER I spoke to the Acura driver, and while apologetic to a point, he stated that since I pointed him by, he expected me to let him "have the track" (not an exact quote, but a paraphrase), and that the real cause of the incident was that his tires had been going away, and that he really lost them at that point. After 5-10 minutes of calm, rational conversation (as much as I could at that point, I felt he didn't "get it", and I informed him that a protest was filed, and that I was going to confirm that with the Chief Steward at that point (the CS asked me to talk to the guy before making my protest official- I hadn't because until I spoke to the Stewards, I wasn't calm enough to talk to the guy constructively).

WTF? I mean really, WTF?
Let me list the things wrong with the above...
1. The Chief Steward asking you to talk to the guy. Hey, that's a courtesy that one driver might extend to another, but a race steward has no business suggesting, let alone asking, that you speak to the other driver. It's my choice whether I want to do that or not. It's his job to manage the event according to the GCR and talking to the other driver is not in the GCR. You've got 30 freaking minutes to protest and you've already lost one-third of that getting back to the paddock and up to the tower.
2. The Chief Steward asking you to talk to the guy when you are clearly really torqued. What the hell is he hoping to accomplish - a couple of 2.8.1 violations?
3. Intent? Intent? Jesus on a pogo stick! There's nothing in the GCR about intent. Hell, how many times have you been part of a group that was a bit physical and the CS gave the group a Come-to-Jesus talk? So now it is OK to hit another driver as long as you didn't intend to do it?
4. The SoMs leaving their testicles at home. Look, nobody wants to be the bad guy, but for kee-rist's sake, that's their job. It's pretty darn simple - if you don't want to hand out penalties and hear protests, then don't be a fracking SoM.
5. The supps for the event being gone as far as I can find: I want to know who the SoMs were.

I've decided that I will probably nnot appeal the decision, but I will be contacting the SOM and CS later just to share my thoughts as I've presented them here.

You've got to appeal, otherwise you condone the system where noting is done to overly aggressive drivers.

Sorry to hear that the weekend had to end early. You going to be at the Double?

[RedMisted]

All the shit on the weekend, the punting of the Shelby, the flap between ITRs #10 and #15, and the actions of the demonic driver in the #21 ITB VW all point to a CS and SOM that didn't want to do their jobs. They wanted nothing of all the paperwork and investigating, etc. that these events would have entailed.

Half the stuff that goes on in any race never gets fully sorted because the "officials" in the control towers are sometimes too damn lazy and just want to get on to the beers. How do I know? A well-respected person in SCCA who often serves as a CS and on SOMs once commented as much...

This weekend's IT fest was an event that Group 2 drivers are going to remember for a long time to come. I wouldn't be surprised if some stay away next year...

[preparedcivic]

I've decided that I will probably not appeal the decision, but I will be contacting the SOM and CS later just to share my thoughts as I've presented them here.

Matt:

I was the "camera" car in the vid, #5 white CRX that was chasing you hard when the hit occurred. Seeing it right in front of me was a big WTF moment; that was my first thought, my second was I was glad the guy got by me on the straight driving like that.

Let me know if you want the original MPEG file. I'd be happy to provide, and would have at the event but no one came to find me.

[lateapex911]

Matt, thankyou for writing paper. That is something that obviously needs to be done, and clearly needs to be done more often. That said, please appeal. Every one of us needs to contribute to the knowledge base on other drivers. This is your time.

I'm sure the Acura driver is a nice enough guy, but you were MUGGED, Matt. What he was doing way over on the inside, WAY too shallow, with WAY too much speed, I'll never know. Amazingly stupid for someone with a racing license . Of COURSE he's going to go tangental. Ever heard of an early apex? I don't for a second buy the "my tires were going off" bs. Well, if they were, then why weren't you adjusting your lines, braking points and throttle openings? That's called driving.

Simple fact is you let him all the room in the world, and you can't just vaporize. He SHOULD have been right up close to your passenger door in the braking zone, and at turn in, in order to:
1- Make sure you know where he is,
2- Make the corner as large a radius as possible, since he may, or may not be able to clear the overlap by track out, and might not be able to use the last 5 feet of track at track out.
3- and to control YOUR turn in. YOU can't turn in until HE turns in. (not that you did anything wrong, but, he was so far out of your field of vision, it would have been easy for you to have assumed he backed out and you might have taken a crack at getting closer to the apex. (boom))

This one is black and white, yet it appears he doesn't feel he was in the wrong. He was. 100%. He needs to "Get that".